March 5, 2015

Modern Period

The ancient world view was that there are standards for things, ideals about the way that things should be. The debate was over whether these ideals existed in the heavens or whether they were embedded in things themselves. The modern world abandoned this view. They recognized that ideals or standards for objects were things that we imposed on them. Modern thinkers saw a divide between what exists in the world on its own and what we bring into existence with our minds via perceptions. The necessary properties that an object has are its primary qualities. These include things like taking up space and being in time. The accidental properties that an object has are its secondary qualities. Secondary qualities include sensations like color, hardness, odor, as well as values such as beauty, goodness, usefulness. Two of the most significant modern thinkers were David Hume and Immanuel Kant.

Hume

  1. David Hume
    Historian
    Born: May 7, 1711, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Died: August 25, 1776, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Education: University of Edinburgh


  2. Teachings

Value, he determined, must be subjective in some sense, rather than objective. He thought value was inter-subjectively determined. This means that each person on his or her own arrives to a consensus about what should be valued. That value judgement is made by answering a simple question: do I like this? But not just anybody determines what that consensus is. Hume says that we must trust those who are unimpaired, who have discernment, and who have taste to ultimately determine what is valuable. For Hume an unimpaired person is one who lacks disability such as blindness or deafness, a discerning person is one who makes well informed kinds of decisions and a tasteful person has an appreciation for things that have long been appreciated.



Applications


For Hume a good website is one that people with taste like.
  • Unified by being liked -- we can quickly see that the masses like the content; professionals (those who like what has traditionally been liked over time) like the content; and peers (those who like what we have liked) like the content 
  • Accessible by sensibility -- we participate by consuming and liking the content because of how it affects us or how other similar things that have stood the test of time have affected us 
  • Ongoing by tradition -- we hope to like what will endure into the future 

Kant

Immanuel Kant
Philosopher
Born: April 22, 1724, Königsberg, Germany
Died: February 12, 1804, Königsberg, Germany
Education: University of Königsberg (1740–1746)



Teachings

Kant said that it was Hume who awoke him from his dogmatic slumbers, meaning that instead of just accepting principles he wanted to figure out the reasons for them.

Kant saw that there were limitations in empiricist thinking. He sought to determine what it is we need in order to even have experience at all. He thought that there are concepts that we bring to experience that are pre-built into us. These are concepts we all share, like space and time. Just try to imagine having an experience that occurs without location or duration. There are other concepts that we formulate ourselves, and we enjoy doing so, which Kant calls the free play of the imagination. To Kant, more important than just whether we like something or not is if we enjoy the process of thinking about and assessing things.


Applications

For Kant a good website is one that people like because of their authentic, reflective judgement. 
  • Unified by being being articulately reviewed -- we can see that articulate, authentic reviewers all like praising it 
  • Accessible by sense -- we can participate by formulating fitting concepts to describe the best content 
  • Ongoing reviews -- we can continue to articulately review the best content 

Descending Alone Before Ascending Together



Soren Kierkegaard gave a parable about a King who wanted to win the love of a peasant girl, or a Maiden from the video above. In order to do this, he had to first dethrone himself and descend to her level. Only in this way could he know that her love for him was for him and not for his status as King.

There is similar sort of matching when it comes to using social media. You must speak to the level of your audience. Marketers know this, and they do it well. There is a science of statistics to knowing what what people want and what works and what doesn't work in terms of the medium you use to get it to them.

The sad thing about our society though is that what people want is often not what they need. And, what they need is not what they want. In order to elevate the culture, first one must do as the King and descend to its level. But, where you start is not where you end.

The culture will drag down weak souls and so you must do as Nietzsche would say and overcome the herd mentality of the masses. You must be strong to do this and not merely pander to their needs.

BYU, where I attend school, has a TV station who has a two fold purpose for their television programs:
  1. To Entertain
  2. To Educate
It is helpful to look at the two as inversely related. The more entertaining, the less educating it is; and the more educating it is, the less entertaining it is. The best is to do both, but there is a delicate balance and that's why it is key to know your audience.

You have to find out where they are at on the continuum or merely wanting to be entertained to wanting to be inspired, enlightened, or invigorated to act and change.

The parable of the King and the Maiden relates back to Jesus Christ and how he became a man, a mortal, to descend in order that we might ascend and that we might be like him. And, that our love for him will be as his love for us already is and always was. Just like the King.

 

 

March 4, 2015

Timeline






Ben has the doc if you want to make edits today.

Guidelines for Philosopher Posts

Title of Page: Philosopher's name

Who is this?
<Brief history of the philosopher>

Aristotle's Teachings
-
-
-
-
-

Applications to Social Media
-
-
-
-

Critiquing WebPhil

My thoughts, I think, go a little beyond what we are able to do this semester, but perhaps this could be considered for future classes.

Kierkegaard may suggest that we should stay true to ourselves and our beliefs.  That sounds a lot like staying true to our own character.  To me, I took that to mean that we should focus on what we like to do while being able to learn and work with others.  Where am I going with this?  Well, here comes the critique.

I don't think we should be doing everything that we are doing.  It is almost like we are reinventing the wheel.  We should invite people that know about websites to our class.  Those who know how to find good hosts (i.e. WordPress) or good builders and knows what the most successful ones are currently.  He should be able to look over our shoulder and offer insight about what we're looking at.

I recently asked these questions to myself.  What is this class about?  Is it about building a website?  No.  Is it about starting a consulting business?  No.  Is it about creating catchy videos?  No.  What is this class about?  It is about critiquing a website through the eyes of a thousand years of great thinkers and offering specific ideas of how the site may be improved according to time tested philosophies.

In other words, if at all possible, a TA, student (maybe graduate student), invited guest, or someone should be a part of this class that can take care of the technicalities about "our website".  Also, someone should be available to help create catchy clips about our research and outside critiques thus far.  This doesn't mean we take a back seat and stop learning, it is more about getting a very knowledgable and helpful co-pilot or navigator.  Given the restraints of this class, some things need to be put on a fast track so that future PHIL 414R students can truly gain experience by looking at websites through great eyes while learning the other necessary but sideline skills.

This is getting too long.